Erie Insurance Company v. Amazon.Com, Inc.

925 F.3d 135 (4th Cir. 2019)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Trung Cao purchased a headlamp on D's website and then gave it to his friends, Minh and Anh Nguyen, as a gift. The headlamp's batteries malfunctioned, igniting the friends' house and causing $313,166.57 in damages. Cao purchased the headlamp on D's website, and the document evidencing the transaction stated that the headlamp was 'sold by: Dream Light' - and 'Fulfilled by: Amazon.' This information was displayed to Cao on the website when he purchased the headlamp. The headlamp was paid for by credit card and delivered to Cao. Under D's fulfillment program, D provides logistics services for a fee. The seller ships its inventory to D warehouse for storage and, once an order was received online for a product, D will retrieve the product from inventory, box it, and ship it to the purchaser. Dream Light used Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA). No explicit warranty information was provided by Dream Light. After paying the fire loss, Erie Insurance Company (P), as subrogee, commenced this action against Amazon, asserting products liability claims based on its allegation that Amazon was the 'seller' of the headlamp and therefore had the liability attributable to sellers of defective goods under Maryland law. The district court granted summary judgment to D, concluding that Amazon was not the 'seller.' The fulfillment role as far as D is concerned is that it stored the product at the expense and risk of the seller Dream Light. D allowed the merchandise to be advertised on D's webpage. Once an item is purchased all D would do is take the product from its fulfillment center, put it in a box, and send it to the purchaser who made arrangements to buy the Dream Light. D would collect the money and ultimately remit to Dream Light whatever is left over after D had covered its various charges. P appealed.